Ann: Notices Under Section 249D of the Corporations Act, page-6

Maybe we'll know something by the week's end bmloho!?

It's not good for the company to have a public fight. It demonstrates dysfunction at the top. Also, money spent (on the EGM) would be better put into the ground instead.

The paradox of course could be that the dispute might elevate the SP because of the opposing camps wanting to increase their respective percentages. That would be an extreme thing to do though. They would be better settling their differences across a round table, maybe with the aid of a trained mediator.

Like any dispute or problem, 100% one way or the other may not be the best result. Let's go 50/50 instead here. Susan V, 'last on first off' principle departs; Neville B comes on in her place, but as Chairman; Bronwyn B stays as a ordinary non-exec Director (little face lost, excuse being too busy with Mod etc - which she must be). Later on BB may resign and someone else comes on.

MF keeps all of his shares; Talkie keeps al of his shares, and so on!